Critical cartography

Critical Cartography is a set of mapping practices and lens of analysis grounded in critical theory, specifically the thesis that maps reflect and perpetuate relations of power, typically in favor of a society's dominant group.'Maps are never value-free images' - John Brian Harley'Maps anticipated empire.' - John Brian Harley Critical Cartography is a set of mapping practices and lens of analysis grounded in critical theory, specifically the thesis that maps reflect and perpetuate relations of power, typically in favor of a society's dominant group. Critical cartography developed in the late 1980s and early 1990s in opposition to the dominant tradition of mapping as a progressive and neutral reflection of the environment. Critical cartographers contend that, since ancient historical times, maps have been produced to benefit the visions of the ruling class. Advocates of critical cartography aimed to reveal the “‘hidden agendas of cartography’ as tools of socio-spatial power”. Critical cartographers put forward new mapping practices, called Counter-mapping, that challenge formal maps of the state. Counter-mapping mostly refers to maps made by indigenous cartographers but can include maps from other sources as well. Counter-mappers work in reaction to what they describe as encroachment by colonial influences. Counter-maps have been used to press indigenous claims for rights over land. The aim of Critical Cartography is to reduce the gap between a more technically oriented map design and a more theoretical analysis of power in society. Critical cartography originated in the 1960's through the works of ways and others. Organizations such as Counter-Cartographies Collective (USA), Iconoclasistas (Argentina), and Bureau d’Etudes (France) have since emerged. Since the 1991 death of John Brian Harley, formerly a professor in Geography at the University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, the field of cartography has flourished with theories and writing that identify maps as social issues and expressions of power and knowledge. Leading figures that have picked up where Harley left off include Denis Cosgrove, Denis Wood, Jeremy Crampton, John Krygier, and Kevin St. Martin. Maps are now viewed as potential sites of power and knowledge. They are sources of knowledge of geography, places and people. John Brian Harley (1932-1991) was a geographer, cartographer, and map historian. He lectured at the universities of Birmingham, Liverpool, Exeter, and Wisconsin Milwaukee. Some of his works include Christopher Greenwood, County Map-Maker (1962), Maps for the local historian (1972), Ordnance Survey Maps: a Descriptive Manual (1975), Concepts in the History of Cartography (1980), and The New Nature of Maps (2001) which was a combination of his essays and was published after his death His work for critical cartography included incorporating ideas of power, ideology, and surveillance into the understanding of mapping. He considered maps to be social documents that need to be understood in their historical contexts which include the situations in which they were made and used. While they can be interpreted at face value, maps also possess symbolism that can communicate political power. Cartography allows for power to be inscribed on the land. Harley discouraged people from believing maps to be “above the politics of knowledge”. Denis Cosgrove (1948-2008) was a professor of geography at UCLA who was concerned with the role of spatial images and representation in the making and communicating of knowledge. He was also interested in the physical world and the limits it placed on human progress. He differentiated between dominant and alternative cultures, noting that the dominant culture's control of the cartographic representation of a given region. In his book Maps, Knowledge, Power, Harley states that maps “were used in colonial promotion” because they claimed lands “before they were effectively occupied”. During early exploration there were no maps of the Americas for the settlers to utilize so they had to create their own. By doing this, early settlers defined the political, economic, and cultural shapes of colonial North America. They legitimized the reality of conquest and empire. Many explorers, including Christopher Columbus renamed places in the Americas with Western Christian names. These names helped create a new space that was compliant with Western beliefs and therefore could be governed and controlled. For example, English colonists took possession of an area Powhatan Indians called Tsenacomoco and turned it into an English colony named ‘Virginia’. They exploited the indigenous community to create the maps that helped them establish colonies. Later in the Middle East, British colonial authorities in Palestine enforced a property mapping regime to replace local practices that negotiated borders and land use, shifting power from peasants to colonial institutions. In 1569, Gerardus Mercator introduced a map projection of the Earth which is now known as the Mercator projection. This projection maintained equally spaced longitudinal lines but spaced out the latitudinal lines. These lines were spaced farther apart as their distance from the Equator increased. This means that areas farther away from the Equator seam to be disproportionately large. Greenland, for example, appears to be larger than the continent of Africa. In reality, Africa’s area is 14 times greater than that of Greenland. Due to its common usage, the Mercator had and continues to have a great influence on people’s view of the world. By making countries near the equator appear smaller than those of Europe or North America, it caused people to consider those countries as less important. The powerful countries seemed larger while the other nations seemed to shrink. This also causes people to think of those regions (such as Africa or South America) as a single place or country rather than continent containing vast diversity and a multitude of cultures and languages. The Mercator projection promotes a “subtle Eurocentrism.” Unfortunately, Web mapping applications use a version of the Mercator projection known as the Web Mercator. The biases formed from the Mercator projection will no longer be due to atlas and textbooks but will come from digital maps and GPS on our phones and computers. The rising popularity of digital mapping systems (such as Google Maps, Apple Maps, and Microsoft Bing Maps) highlights the role of cartography in representing occupied territories. While parts of the occupied territories are labeled on the maps (for example, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip), the name of country associated with these territories is not always labeled on the map.